[DomLuka] Magical Moments in Dom's Stories

[Gearoid]

Magical moments in the fiction of Dom Luka

 

For the past week I have been struggling to understand Emmanuel Levinas

[AFriendlyFace]

I think it's one of life's great paradoxes that "living in the moment" can bring such a sense of happiness and peace, yet to live in the moment is to forget the lessons of the past, and to undervalue the potential of the future. Living in the moment, especially where it overlaps with instant gratification in general, is responsible for many of the problems people face. Smoking, drinking, gambling, compulsive shopping, over-eating, drugs, casual sex; they all seem appealing "in the moment"; however, when viewed with more perspective, with a firm understanding of your past habits and potential problems, these things can often be identified as obvious "bad ideas".

 

The trouble with Western society in general is that it seems to advocate this mindless self-indulgence, while at the same time implicitly putting value on the past and future. Yet, everyone "knows" by conventional wisdom what a bad idea it is to "live in the past". Similarly it clearly quite dangerous to "miss your life" by always anticipating and planning for "what's next". How can one win in this endless cycle of trying to balance past, present, and future?

 

Dom's stories, at least TLW, TOU, and DD, all seem to, in large part, be about the characters struggling with and eventually overcoming their pasts. There also seems to be a very large emphasis on forward looking as the characters learn from their mistakes, present and past, and eventually move toward applying this knowledge for a happier future. Dom's stories by nature seem to deny the "final gratification". Like most stories they end as soon as the major conflicts and problems are resolved. Thus, we never really see the characters "fully happy"; no, our pleasure comes from imagining them fully happy. From contemplating how now that Owen's delt with his issues with his parents, and Aiden's learned to not internalize his mother's problems; how now that they're both "out", and delth with issues of jealousy, how now they can finally be "happy". The same holds true for Quinn and Jude. Indeed for nearly all stories with a happy ending. The happy ending itself seems so important because the reader has sat there and struggled through the charactes' development; it's a natural reaction to want to think "well they've solved their problems and now can be happy".

 

Then there's stories without a happy ending. These too seem to speak to the reader in terms of potentially being better off. The great works which end tragically all seem to have one thing in common; an important lesson or moral can be taken from them. Thus the reader learns something which he or she can apply to their own life, or keep in mind, for useful gain. Even darker messages which speak of the general untrustworthiness of people can be applied by the very pessimistic if not for a happier life, then a more cautious/realistic one.

 

Stories which seem to deliver their "biggest kick" in the story itself usually fall into the category of trivial or even pornographic. To me, the very fact that Dom's stories, to a large extent, focus less on instant gratification and more on eventual fulfillment is a clear demarcation between him and lesser, more tawdry writers. Dom's writing is not only entertainment but also art. In my opinion art is always entertaining, but entertainment isn't always art. I feel very fortunate to have stumbled upon a writer whose material is of such caliber and whose subject matter is so relevant to me, and all for free nonetheless!

 

Thank you Dom! And thank you Geroid and Kitty for the stimulating conversation! Take care all and have a sublime day

Kevin

[Gearoid]

From a Buddhist perspective, what you are describing here is enlightenment. The negative connotation indicated by "doomed" and "trapped" show the way we humans struggle with the world we live in -- our physical bodies (which sooner or later die), the concepts of time and space, and the way we use them to construct our world. If we can get out of that ordinary frame of reference and come at it differently, there is incredible freedom and expansiveness in "the most fleeting present". I'd say that there was an "eternity" in the present, except that word is still within the framework of time as we usually conceive of it.

 

To see a world in a grain of sand,

And a heaven in a wild flower,

Hold infinity in the palm of your hand,

And eternity in an hour.

 

-- William Blake, "Auguries of Innocence"

Hi PR

 

Thank you for such a thoughtful reply to my post. The philosophy of time is very tricky stuff and I would not claim to be across it at all. I am so glad, though, that you agree with me about Dom

[shadows]

Dear Lord, it's english class. They're even quoting Eagleton! Not in my beloved DD you don't. No sirree. Anyway, according to Psychoanalysis Rory's desire for Seth is due to the absent father... which actually seems to work.

 

Oh hell.

 

//shadows

[Gearoid]

Kevin wrote:

 

The trouble with Western society in general is that it seems to advocate this mindless self-indulgence, while at the same time implicitly putting value on the past and future. Yet, everyone "knows" by conventional wisdom what a bad idea it is to "live in the past". Similarly it clearly quite dangerous to "miss your life" by always anticipating and planning for "what's next". How can one win in this endless cycle of trying to balance past, present, and future?

 

Dom's stories, at least TLW, TOU, and DD, all seem to, in large part, be about the characters struggling with and eventually overcoming their pasts. There also seems to be a very large emphasis on forward looking as the characters learn from their mistakes, present and past, and eventually move toward applying this knowledge for a happier future. Dom's stories by nature seem to deny the "final gratification". Like most stories they end as soon as the major conflicts and problems are resolved. Thus, we never really see the characters "fully happy"; no, our pleasure comes from imagining them fully happy. Kevin

 

Hi Kevin,

 

I think this view of time is actually the key to understanding Dom's work. So many of his characters - Rory for instance are dominated by the past in the present. When Rory opens up his present and hears his mother's voice the dominance of the past in the present is almost complete.

 

Similarly Rory

[Gearoid]

Dear Lord, it's english class. They're even quoting Eagleton! Not in my beloved DD you don't. No sirree. Anyway, according to Psychoanalysis Rory's desire for Seth is due to the absent father... which actually seems to work.

 

Oh hell.

 

//shadows

 

 

Oops - there is always one

 

Dear Shadows

 

It cannot be helped. Intellectualism like the bird flu and Dr. Johnson's cheerfulness will keep breaking out. Though I may have quoted Eagleton be assured that my commitment to DD is as great as yours.

 

 

Besides I did signal "serious" as in you don't have to read it if you don't want to. For a highly desireable change in your attitude to English classes go to Acts 9:5.

 

 

Gearoid

[shadows]

Ah, no worries. It's more like DD is one of the few stories I read for pleasure these days. Actually English is probably my favorite (and best) subject, it helps to have a good teacher. After all, with some of the more horrible realizations one comes to, it helps to remember that "it's only there if you choose to see it."

 

But, if it makes you feel any better, and not despair for the youth of America, I shall soon be writing a paper on the "Magical Realist" novel Neuromancer. Just as soon as I find out what magical realism is of course...

 

//shadows

 

Perhaps I'm being dense, but why that chapter/verse? Is it the pun on hard?

Edited February 12, 2006 by shadows

[LittleBuddhaTW]

Geniuses are a unique phenomenon. For a genius writer, the words just flow out of the pen and on to the page, most likely with very little thought as to their deeper significance. For genius musicians, the melody just appears to them. Some of the greatest writers have little or no training in literature, and some of the greatest musicians have very little training in music. We, as critics, look at a work at can find all kinds of hidden meanings, subtle nuiances, and significance that the creator (author/artist/musician) never even thought of ... it was just the natural flow of his/her creativity. The notion of "time" in Dom's stories is interesting ... but reading the discussion, I now remember why I switched from a philosophy major to majoring in Chinese! hehe Unless Dom were to state otherwise (which is the interesting thing about having an author that "interacts" with his readership, as opposed to most "traditional" authors), I would guess that he hasn't really thought about "time" in his stories, at least not at such an abstruse level.

 

I agree that the "DomLuka" in his blog, and the "DomLuka" that comes through in the stories seem like two very different people ... however, I wouldn't describe him as "gormless" at all. I get the impression that he is extremely sharp, and his somewhat enigmatic air is quite intentionally (and methodically) crafted.

[DavyReader]

I'd like to revert to the question about time.

I'd say that there was an "eternity" in the present, except that word is still within the framework of time as we usually conceive of it.

 

To see a world in a grain of sand,

And a heaven in a wild flower,

Hold infinity in the palm of your hand,

And eternity in an hour.

 

-- William Blake, "Auguries of Innocence"

Another classical quote encompassing that concept is the following:

Linger on, thou art so beautiful!

If Faust is ready to ask this of the current moment (sexual innuendo implied), the devil may take his soul. That means: We strive for total happiness, and in case we are ever going to reach it, we'd like to stretch the blissful moment to infinite length, knowing it cannot last. We might even be willing to trade in our souls or lives for it.

Better pass boldly into that other world, in the full glory of some passion, than fade and wither dismally with age.

But I guess that this is rather a romantic view.

[Gearoid]

Ah, no worries. It's more like DD is one of the few stories I read for pleasure these days. Actually English is probably my favorite (and best) subject, it helps to have a good teacher. After all, with some of the more horrible realizations one comes to, it helps to remember that "it's only there if you choose to see it."

 

But, if it makes you feel any better, and not despair for the youth of America, I shall soon be writing a paper on the "Magical Realist" novel Neuromancer. Just as soon as I find out what magical realism is of course...

 

//shadows

 

Perhaps I'm being dense, but why that chapter/verse? Is it the pun on hard?

 

Dear Shadows,

 

This is my second attempt to reply to this. So I hope this does not appear twice from out of cyber space.

 

Firstly there is never any question of me despairing of the youth of America. On several occasions I have been fortunate enough to get to know a group of young Americans. However their elders are something else entirely.

 

Now you have my sympathy in your desire to defend the art of reading for pleasure.and indeed your post made me feel terribly guilty. Aeons ago I went to uni as a voracious reader of fiction and three years later I emerged from the study of English literature as what I can only describe as a broken reader. I have never been able to recapture that first fine careless rapture. Now I process books. The advantage of reading serialised fiction is that I cannot start at the end of the book as I usually do.

 

But Dom is a very fine writer and I wanted to pay tribute to that in my own way.

 

As to why that Ch and that verse

Edited February 12, 2006 by naper_vic

[Gearoid]

I'd like to revert to the question about time.

 

Another classical quote encompassing that concept is the following:

 

If Faust is ready to ask this of the current moment (sexual innuendo implied), the devil may take his soul. That means: We strive for total happiness, and in case we are ever going to reach it, we'd like to stretch the blissful moment to infinite length, knowing it cannot last. We might even be willing to trade in our souls or lives for it.

 

But I guess that this is rather a romantic view.

 

I think the key is the relationship between eternity and time. The two are quite distinct. We are trapped in time though we can at times make fleeting break throughs to a glimpse of eternity. It is that what I think is at work in my response to the finger touching sequence in DD.

 

The philosopher JEM McTaggart's writing on time is truly as Little Buddha would say "abstruse". He queried whether there was a past, present and future (series A) or just events happening one after another (series . But he did talk of a series C which was outside time and consisted of universal and eternal love.

 

That of course is where we all want to get to, but the reading about it is a lot easier than the getting.

 

regards

 

Gearoid

[Gearoid]

Hi Kitty,

 

It's late here and I'm going to turn in. I've haven't anything to say in response to this post. It takes me beyond words. Yet I wanted you to know I read it and I thank you for it.

regards

 

Gearoid

[glomph]

Geniuses are a unique phenomenon. For a genius writer, the words just flow out of the pen and on to the page, most likely with very little thought as to their deeper significance. For genius musicians, the melody just appears to them. Some of the greatest writers have little or no training in literature, and some of the greatest musicians have very little training in music.

 

That's one notion of genius. For the view on the other extreme, see Edison's percentages.

 

Beethoven comes to mind, certainly a genius in my book. He spent hours and days working and reworking. He would go out into the woods and sing and mutter and yell until he had something just right. The result is that his music is just perfect. You may or may not care for it, but that's a matter of taste, not his craft.

 

Mozart was very prolific in his short life, and the music just flowed out of him, but he spent much more time working out things than appears at least in the movies.

 

I think the composer that best fits your idea of genius is Bruckner. He had limited formal training and was devoutly religious and attributed his musical works to direct inspiration. For me, anyway, his music shows that. The whole amounts to somewhat less than the sum of the parts. It is like we have this nice bit, and then another nice bit, and then another one that may be more filler, and then something nice again, but no sense that he has ever taken us anywhere.

[knotme]

That's one notion of genius. For the view on the other extreme, see Edison's percentages...

I think the composer that best fits your idea of genius is Bruckner. He had limited formal training and was devoutly religious and attributed his musical works to direct inspiration. For me, anyway, his music shows that. The whole amounts to somewhat less than the sum of the parts. It is like we have this nice bit, and then another nice bit, and then another one that may be more filler, and then something nice again, but no sense that he has ever taken us anywhere.

Agreed. I don't know much about literature, so I'll follow your little digression into music: Borodin is another example of beautiful bits that don't add up to all that much. Genius alone is rarely enough to generate significant art. Edison's percentages rule

[Gearoid]

Agreed. I don't know much about literature, so I'll follow your little digression into music: Borodin is another example of beautiful bits that don't add up to all that much. Genius alone is rarely enough to generate significant art. Edison's percentages rule

 

The very category of genius is of course disputed. But, and may god forgive me, the thing I know must about is cricket, so I will go to that rather than music, if I may.

 

I have seen two genuine cricketing "geniuses" in my time - the West Indian Gary Sobers and the Australian Shane Warne. Neither are very brilliant men - just blessed for a time with exceptional ability. No one ever in the history of cricket could do what they did. But strangely enough they were only in the eceptional, touched-by-the- gods phase for a brief time - around a year or so. But in that phase everything seemed to come easy and no one could come even close to their level.

 

 

After that they were just very good. I think it is the fallen-from-the-Olympian heights phase that Edison's percentages kick in.

 

Now back to Dom if I get time I will write about what for me is another magical moment but at the risk of repeating myself I think the finger-touching episode in Ch 26 was truly exceptional - as to why I am still trying to work that out.

 

regards

 

Gearoid

[glomph]

I think it is the fallen-from-the-Olympian heights phase that Edison's percentages kick in.

 

I don't know anything about cricket, but I suspect your statement may be more true for athletes, where so much depends upon fleeting reflexes, coordination, eyesight, and eye-muscular coordination, than for musicians. I don't know about writers, since that whole process is a mystery to me. I have some verbal skills, I believe, but I find the process of writing anything beyond a quick message like this, well, ... "painful" is the word that comes to mind. And, there, that's what I mean. If I were a better writer, maybe I could tell you what I mean, and so here I sit cringing before a half-blank white rectangle, wanting to delete this message rather than try to finish that sentence.

 

So I'll change the subject back to music for a moment. I don't think Beethoven ever fell from the heights. Quite the contrary. He built his own tower on top of the summit. But all along he did Edison proud in the perspiration department. And in the end he is deaf and bitter and raging against heaven, giving us the Ninth Symphony with its "Ode to Joy" and boldly going where listeners are still challenged to follow with his Opus 111 piano sonata and the late string quartets.

[Gearoid]

Magical Moments 2

 

I have nominated the finger touching sequence in Ch 26 of DD as a moment of true magic and I was really pleased to learn that others agreed with me. My other favourite moment or to be more accurate moments in Dom

[glomph]

Great post, Gearoid. It brought back some great memories of the story.

 

The "No wait. Not attracted." sequence down to "What he looked like shirtless and knelt over the hood of that old El Camino." is really great.

 

Quinn annoyed the heck out of me, even more so than Rory did at first. I probably didn't appreciate that paragraph at the time in ways that I can now.

[nicks_a_writer]

i'm not following anything

 

later ~ nick

[Gearoid]

Picked up a book today on Philosophy and Buffy the Vampire Slayer. I do not watch Buffy but will have to after reading the book. It is strange how that is with me. I often seem to need to read a book so I can watch something and enjoy it - the curse of intellectualism I suppose.

 

Anyway some of the articles are on good and evil etc in Buffy. I have been thinking of applying the same concepts to Dom's stuff. (The groans out there from Shadows & Nick are almost audible down here. )

 

So I will have a think about good and evil in Dom's work and revisit the Aaron Keslin evil thread. My first thought is that Aaron is the nearest Dom gets to a Nietzschean character in that Aaron shows signs of being beyond good and evil and of writing or creating his own moral system. But Dom pulls back from that and Aaron ends up as an object of pity rather than of fear and envy.

 

There are articles in the book on feminist ethics. I don't know if anyone has tackled the question of what a specifically gay ethics might be like. Has anyone read anything about this?

 

regards

 

Gearoid

[Gearoid]

Good & Evil in Dom Luka's fiction

 

 

I have been working through the articles on Buffy and thinking at the same time of the thread on Aaron and Evil that has been going on. I had originally meant to do something on Good and Evil in Dom

[dkstories]

Hmmm...all I'm going to say is 5 points for being the first to make the connection between Jarred and Nietzsche. I actually brought a few points from his work into play when I created Jarred. There was just never any expectation on my part that anyone would make that connection.

[DavyReader]

Now is there any sense in which Aaron of DD is a Nietzschean figure? I think there is a faint whiff of this but Dom backs away from it. Aaron does play mind games about sex with both Luke and Rory and Seth too. But he does not hold to this path and the penultimate time we saw him he was just a lost boy that we wanted to reach out and comfort (well some of us did!).

In that respect Aaron is similar to Raskolnikof in "Crime and Punishment" by Fyodor M. Dostoyevsky. The reason neither Dom's Aaron nor Fyodor's Raskolnikof hold to this path is that there is no such thing as an ubermensch in reality. But I have to say that I feel a little bit awkward with these comparisons. What about sticking more to the text?

[Gearoid]

In that respect Aaron is similar to Raskolnikof in "Crime and Punishment" by Fyodor M. Dostoyevsky. The reason neither Dom's Aaron nor Fyodor's Raskolnikof hold to this path is that there is no such thing as an ubermensch in reality. But I have to say that I feel a little bit awkward with these comparisons. What about sticking more to the text?

 

 

Hi DR,

 

 

 

Thanks for reading and commenting on what I said. Now you express unease and then call for us to stick more to the text. But I would counter claim that I am doing just that. I am formulating judgements and they take the classic EDEN form. They are expressive - I put them up on the board. They are descriptive - I am describing the fictional worlds created by Dom. Equally important my judgements are evidential in that I do refer to the stories. And of course they are normative fiduciary in that they are put forward seriously as my opinions and I am not just jerking around.

 

As for my post it is really a spin off from the very interesting thread on Aaron Keslin as evil or not evil. I have contributed to that and my considered judgement on Aaron is fairly quoted by you above. I will now respond to your judgement. You say that Aaron's character is incomplete as a Nietzschean figure just as Raskolnikof's is because there is no such thing as an ubermensch in reality, and by this I take you to mean actuality. I grant that but the problem is that we are not dealing with actuality and in reality the ubermensch certainly does exist as a real tendency and a real mechanism. How else could it turn up in dkstories's work? Not to mention in Nietzsche's ASZ of course.

 

I still think that the reason why Aaron is not a thorough going ubermensch like figure has probably more to do with the author's own value system. I also believe that the generic conventions of the teenage romance block the creation of such a character. It is of interest to me in this context that in a genre such as the Vampire tale, where the conventions do lend themselves to the construction of the ubermensch, Dom does not, IMHO, do so while his co-author Dan goes a ubermensching with great gusto. Maybe that has something to do with his living in Sacramento.

 

Now to return to the matter of your unease, I am genuinely sorry you feel that. There have already been a couple of mutterings about my thread and I am also sorry about them. But as I said before I am a total fan of Dom

[glomph]

While I do see the points made by the critics of the critic and I share some of the main misgivings, I encourage you to continue to take your observations wherever they go and don't worry too much about them. Folks can agree or disagree.

 

I'm liable to do both.

 

One can be amoral just because he is selfish and immature. That seems to be the picture that Dom has painted of Aaron so far.